The world you would walk out into tonight has a government, why would we talk about a world without government set in the present?

Well, who knows what I would have if we were talking about a world without the 75%+ drag on our economy provided by government. In such a world I might have laserbeams that could completely destroy anything in my path.

Even with the government, don't try to steal my car or truck. I won't be waiting around for the police to show up to take a report.

All this talk about guns and government, I thought the issue was undocumented immigrants. Is the idea that the US lacks an effective government and hence that patriotic citizens themselves, in revamped readings of 2nd Amendment rights, ought to arm themselves to shoot and kill defenseless impoverished Mexican stoop laborers scrambling across the desert? If this seems reasonable to anyone I can appreciate why caliber and firepower would be an issue as they'd probably be confronting like-mindeds who focus on property acquisition picking more affluent targets.

Oh. Are we talking about some theoretical future? I was talking about what I would walk out the door with this evening.

I guess I was confused.

Keith

You evidently don't catch on too quick. The point is, that without law and order, provided by some form of government and cops, you'd either own nothing of any value or else you'd spend all your time trying to defend what you owned. It would be tough to make a living under those conditions.

without law and order, provided by some form of government and cops, you'd either own nothing of any value or else you'd spend all your time trying to defend what you owned.

Yes, I think this is true, the government is the repository of power, but power does "grow from the barrel of a gun". Absent a government, the next thing down would be the ultimate authority, whether this be the state's own military, the municipal police or the Sheriff's office, ultimately its down to firepower or caliber and size of one's arsenal. This is why one makes reference to so many rounds or pounds of ammo he could carry in his truck.

Just like blacks under the Fugitive Slave Act or Jews under the Nuremberg Laws. Interesting how bigotry suddenly is represented by as "respect for the law." Some laws don't deserve respect.

What's wrong with the law Rick? And what bigotry are you referring to? All illegal aliens are breaking the law irrespective of race, creed or religious belief. If a white blonde-haired Christian Caucasian enters our borders illegally, he is as much a criminal as a Mexican who sneaks in from Tijuana or a Muslim Arab from Abu Dhabi.

TRUTH: Prior to 1965 when the disastrous Immigration Bill was passed, there was very little immigration. In fact, between 1925 and 1965, there was even a period of net emigration out of the United States. During this time, our grass was getting cut, our meat was being packed, our children were being watched and our houses were being cleaned. The idea that somehow we suddenly can't run a country without an unlimited supply of foreigners is absurd.

Those in favor of foreign labor are corporations who are addicted to cheap labor. They are the ones who are benefiting. But their benefit comes at the American tax payer's expense when you consider that the American tax payer is virtually subsidizing the labor costs of the greedy corporations by supplying the illegal foreign workers and their families with welfare, free education, free medical, WICs, housing assistance, etc. -- something the corporations won't do.

Americans won't allow themselves to be exploited like illegals do, but they WILL do the work that illegals do for fair compensation and benefits. If Americans did the work that illegals do at higher pay, would that benefit the consumer? You bet it would in the long run. But many Americans who do not care about America's future are consumers who favor the idea of exploiting illegal workers because it keeps commodity and service prices down in the short term.' "

Your comments are appreciated.

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, story of this country and many others.

All this talk about guns and government, I thought the issue was undocumented immigrants. Is the idea that the US lacks an effective government and hence that patriotic citizens themselves, in revamped readings of 2nd Amendment rights, ought to arm themselves to shoot and kill defenseless impoverished Mexican stoop laborers scrambling across the desert? If this seems reasonable to anyone I can appreciate why caliber and firepower would be an issue as they'd probably be confronting like-mindeds who focus on property acquisition picking more affluent targets.

The discussion is over if the government has any right to limit those who come into the country.

“Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.”
-Albert Einstein